| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Admin
547 Posts |
 Posted - 11/19/2003 : 13:21:26
|
Excerpt from post made by catmanager on 11/14/2003 : 12:41:04.
Maybe this assoc everyone is talking about could have some type of arbitration arrangement to protect everyone involved? |
Roy Cupps -
CatAdjuster.org :: Contact\Feedback :: Adjuster Roster :: Current Forum |
|
|
olderthendirt
USA
370 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 19:38:26
|
| Further to 7, maybe a small number of the more respected members here can offer their services (for a fee of course) as mediators. |
 |
|
|
katadj
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 21:04:40
|
Perhaps our IA agreements should contain language similar to the Appraisal clause in a P&C policy or at the minimum the right to arbitration.
Excellent idea to be incorporated into a Standard Employment Agreement between all IA firms and their independent or temporary employees.
Perhaps one could be drafted here, and voted upon, and become Step 1 of our rebirth.
|
|
|
|
Excallibro
USA
2 Posts |
Posted - 11/14/2003 : 22:26:15
|
This profession should have unionized following the antitrust lawsuit back in the 1960's, before which time adjusting insurance claims was essentially a monopoly. It could of remained a monopoly for the independent adjusting profession, I believe, if they had unionized following that lawsuit, but they failed to do so at a critical juncture in the evolution of this profession.
Of all the professions in the US which could successfully unionize, this is one that could. Not for the sake of just money, but for the sake of personal pride in workmanship, and a recognition of the very real danger and heroism involved in this kind of task.
It's time to unionize before it's too late. Unionization simply means that we care about our profession enough to organize.
Think about it. |
|
|
|
Ghostbuster
476 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 06:27:55
|
Gee whiz, I wish you hadn't gone and used the 'U' word, Excalibro. It would have been better to use the 'A' word for association, or the 'C' word for confederacy, or even the letters 'N-R-P-C-S-K' which stand for Not Returning Phone Calls Serial Killers. Anything but the 'U' word.
Your heart is in the right place, but we've got to watch our language around here. Most of the folks in these parts are squeamish and have delicate sensebilities. It's all part of the Code of the West, pardner. |
|
|
|
ALANJ
USA
159 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 06:34:03
|
| No arbitration! If you research the cost, you'll discover why. |
|
|
|
catmanager
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 08:08:10
|
I agree, Ghost! Excal only needs to dig a little in the previous posts to discover how lucky he is that the posse hasn't strung him up yet! LOL. While I think a lot of us are still adamant about at least finding out what the reality of an association's benefits and downfalls, perception and wording is everything!
Kile, maybe you can shed some light without us doing research on arbitration costs. Having only been party to a few appraisals, I know the carrier I was employed for had minimal costs for sending me, and we had to split the cost of an umpire.
Is it more expensive than going to court (both personally and considering court cost to soceity?)? |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 09:02:46
|
| Sorry, Catmanager, I don't know a whole lot about arbitration. But I do know that unions are the worst thing in the world. I would never be a part of one and have no respect for anyone that hides behind them. All unions do is make it impossible for management to effectively manage their resources and they dumb down everything so that all you ever get is the bare minimum required. Unions squash all individual effort and discourage people from excelling because they want everyone to be exactly the same. I've been in a union before and all it does is take your money and tell you what you can and can't do. I'm a college educated adult. I don't need a union thug from the mafia telling me how and when I can do my job. |
|
|
|
CCarr
Canada
1200 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 09:53:04
|
When Kile takes a stand on an issue, it is always real clear how his feet are planted on the ground. I like that, there is never any need to wonder what he really meant.
Going back to Marc's closing comment yesterday, and then the ensuing discussion; this is once again a piece of "association freight" that is racing downhill, ahead of both the proverbial cart and the horses that follow.
Before you will ever be in a position to discuss with a vendor any additional language to their existing agreements, a professional association will have to be in place and have earned the respect of vendors and carriers, through the manner in which professional competency is consistently provided and supported by the association.
Some form of language for providing ADR for issues that are in dispute between vendors and association members, is a worthy mandate for the association to consider and pursue; as one of its mandates, once the association is established.
As 'well intentioned' as Dave's concluding remark was last night, that is not the way to proceed with the 'rebirth' of any movement towards the forming of an association. |
|
|
|
catmanager
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 10:12:32
|
Good, point Clayton!
I will revive a thread under the heading of Organization. Perhaps there would only be a minute need for problem resolution if indeed the carriers and/or vendors did recognize the EARNED reputation of an organization....After all, if the adjusters deployed had met the criteria for such an organization, the problems encountered should, in turn, be virtually non-existant!...?or minimized!..? |
|
|
|
SeizeOWisdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 11:23:02
|
It is no secret that I believe that an association has little if any chance of success. And I see embracing that position as being realistic, not pessimistic.
Here are just a few of the reasons why:
First of all, if anyone will utilize an internet search engine, you will discover dozens if not hundreds of insurance and insurance specialty organizations already in place; some quite successful and others less so.
If those here truly want to make an association happen, why not focus your efforts toward supporting a NACA or RPA, and once you have your requisite membership in place in those existing organizations, then change the bylaws or mission statement or purposes as you see fit, rather than reinvent the wheel.
Many here seem to think that organizing a new association will suddenly change the playing field among adjusters, vendors and carriers, and I say to them, get your heads out of the sand.
Without debating 'unions' per se, I do think were there an organized united group of cat adjusters which said, we want a place at the table of negotiations for fee schedules and benefits, etc. or else as an organized group we will sit out the next year's storms, then things would change. But by the very nature of the individual independence we all share, that would and will never happen. There would always be those who motivated by self interest would yield to short term gains rather than long term benefits more meaningful to the overall group. The vendors and carriers know as well, we can always be replaced by the next batch of warm bodies.
I have said for years now, that we could improve the overall image of cat adjusters, more easily limit the use of warm bodies and enhance individual financial rewards if we all agreed just that the basic requirement for entry into this field was obtaining the AIC designation or some similar designation recognized as exemplary of claims training, education, discipline and some experience.
Were all cat adjusters AIC's or CPCU's or RPA's then the carriers would notice. Quality would go up dramatically and the number wanting to share in our pie would of course go down, simply for the reasons that these designations have meaning, require much diligence and discipline, and are not handed out ever so freely as Halloween candy.
When I read comments here saying well let's start an association and put together some sort of certification which will show the carriers that we are 'professionals' I have to wonder why we cannot recognize existing designations already out there?
Is this because the certifications being bandied about are not intended to be as tough to obtain? Are you really going to have a certification program which requires several semesters of education to obtain or requires vigorous lengthy examinations which in their stringency have a not inconsiderable flunk rate? Or are you going to design your 'tests' with a curve so everyone passes?
I think the RPA Program ('Registered Professional Adjuster') has the right concept wherein they require lengthy experience, written and oral testing, and other requisites which aren't taken lightly. Similarly, the AIC program requires 4 semesters of education and the CPCU program requires 8 semesters. That's why the ranks in insurance aren't filled with AIC's or CPCU's or RPA's, which gives even greater value such earned achievement. So when I hear those throwing out certification as the answer to some of our problems, I have to agree, but yet wonder why not adopt what's already out there? Is it because they aren't easy to earn or take too much time and money or because there are many who simply couldn't pass the tests?
And I think the answer is twofold: first that what is being advocated is not intended to be as stringent as AIC, CPCU or RPA, thus it will have little or no meaning and not recognized by carriers as equal to the aforementioned existing designations. And secondly, if certification is indeed intended to be meaningful, then by it's very definition, it will limit membership to those with the discipline and desire to earn recognition and not have it handed to them as freely and instantly as a hamburger in a fast food joint.
And when your organization starts saying to some you didn't pass the muster, how long before those disenchanted adjusters stray from your folds, thus costing both dollars and support for your association?
I know this post will not sit well with some, and will be viewed as pessimistic, but without understanding the other side of the argument, you will never answer the objections and fears of the naysayers nor unite the many required to support your concept.
If I understand correctly what was discussed at the meeting which some of you held in Newport News one Sunday during Isabel, I do applaud your ideas and efforts toward setting up local and regional CADO groups, which I do think would be of great benefit to participants and which in my humble opinion, would provide the foundations for whatever groundswells of support which might later focus on a larger association or confederacy of cat adjusters.
I do invite your comments and would be especially interested in hearing more details concerning the ideas of supporters of this concept, who lobby for and anticipate some sort of meaningful association "certification."
Thanks for listening to the other side of the argument. |
Edited by - SeizeOWisdom on 11/15/2003 16:22:42 |
|
|
|
catmanager
USA
102 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 17:33:14
|
| Jim, would you have your post moved to the paid member's section? I revived a thread there so we can keep this topic on target. You have some good points and I know we have a ways to go before we can combine reality with goals....your input there would be appreciated. |
|
|
|
SeizeOWisdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 17:52:17
|
Marc, I have no problem with my prior post being "copied" over to the private section, but I would prefer that the wider CADO audience including non-members be allowed to read and participate in the discussion here.
I further have no problem with the earlier post being moved over to a new thread open to all Forum visitors including non-members which is focused on the specific topic of an association.
My personal interest in such a discussion would be very narrrowly focused on the solitary issue of certification (and perhaps, local and/or regional cat adjuster groups). |
Edited by - SeizeOWisdom on 11/15/2003 18:02:17 |
|
|
|
KileAnderson
USA
875 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 18:36:29
|
| Mechanics have it with ASE, why can't we? |
|
|
|
ChuckDeaton
USA
373 Posts |
Posted - 11/15/2003 : 23:12:07
|
Not long ago we attempted to set up a computer based certification, we invited the contribution of questions and answers, relatively easy questions with clear black and white answers. Some response but not enough. Our point was that if we had a test that no one could answer 100% then grades could be based on statistics.
|
|
|
|
SeizeOWisdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 11/16/2003 : 00:06:57
|
Chuck I am not sure I understand the point you are trying to make.
Are you suggesting your computer based 'certification' would have been topically MORE or LESS comprehensive and MORE or LESS technically stringent than the 4 AIC (three hour) exams or the 8 CPCU (three hour) exams?
And if not, would you not agree that such lesser 'certification' would carry very little IF ANY meaning or weight, to those in power in the insurance corridors of America, and thus, have very little value to adjusters as well as no significance in recognition as an earned designation of professionalism?
If that is the case, my question is WHY?
Now if I could only convince AICPCU to let me submit the questions in advance for my next CPCU exam. |
Edited by - SeizeOWisdom on 11/16/2003 00:12:43 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Association, Will it do us any good?
Forum Locked
